Was Yelp Being Fair When It Fired Talia Jane?

The Internet erupted this weekend when Yelp fired one of its customer service agents, Talia Jane, a few hours after she posted an article to Medium entitled, "An Open Letter To My CEO."

The crux of the open letter was what Ms. Jane considered her inferior level of compensation when compared to her Bay Area living expenses, be it rent, groceries, electricity, Internet, transportation and so on. The letter--starting out with "Dear Jeremy"--was presumably intended for Yelp Chief Executive Officer Jeremy Stoppelman.

(Photo by David Becker/Getty Images for Nightclub & Bar Media Group)

The question I would like to ask is whether the company was being fair.

Was her dismissal just?

Furthermore, was the company being fair to itself?

Let us start with the open letter itself.

Indeed it is distressing.

Ms. Jane begins by delivering low blows to lawyers and teachers. "I didn’t want to become a cliche or drown in student loans," she writes, possibly indicating the reason why she chose her academic path.

As the proud holder of a bachelor's of education degree, my back was already up.

She settled on a role in customer service at Yelp (having moved to the Bay Area to be near her father) as a way in which to transfer into Yelp's Media department, her true passion.

Alas, Ms. Jane was initially perplexed after being hired. Shortly after arriving at Yelp she was informed she would have to work in her customer service role for at least a year before being able to move to a new department.

In my experience, a new hire must demonstrate commitment and competence before moving to a different role in the organization.

She continued to lament about life in her open letter to Mr. Stoppelman.

"I haven’t bought groceries since I started this job," she said. Other fits of discontent included, "I’m still being trained for the same position I’ve got?" and "Will you pay my phone bill for me?" and "Should I sell my car?"

Interspersed throughout the letter is a condescending tone replete with a smug, accusatory naïveté. Take for instance these three examples:

-"Instead of telling you about all the ways I’m withering away from putting my all into a company that doesn’t have my back."

-"Maybe instead, you can help set up something to allow Eat24/Yelp employees to get food from local food banks and soup kitchens?"

-"Because [the coconut water tastes] like the bitter remorse of accepting a job that can’t pay a living wage."

Ms. Jane ends her epic 2,392 word rant with the following:

Anyway, those are my thoughts. I know they’re not worth your time — did you know that the average American earns enough money that the time they would spend picking up a penny costs more than the penny’s worth? I pick up every penny I see, which I think explains why sharing these thoughts is worth my time, even if it’s not worth yours.

Your Friend In Food,

Talia

She managed to find the time to update the Medium post a couple of hours later, informing readers, "I have been officially let go from the company."

Which brings us to the question, was Yelp being fair when it dismissed Talia Jane?

There are two sides to every coin.

Let us first start with the "yes" side.

Ms. Jane was either on a self-induced kamikaze-like mission to get fired, or her lack of judgment was missed by the Yelp recruiters that they had to remedy the hiring error and terminate her immediately.

In all seriousness, a public attack on your CEO is never a good idea. The damning evidence she provided is fodder for any sane executive to issue a quick dismissal accordingly. Ms. Jane's petulance, insecurity, willfully perverse and "head in the sand" level of expectations is as comical as it is stupid. Comeuppance by a CEO--like in this case--would be easier than expertly predicting human trampling at this year's Black Friday shopping extravaganza. (And you know that happens every year, too.)

Imagine the rancor inside of Yelp once word spread of the open letter. Everyone (and I mean everyone) would be talking about Ms. Jane. Not only would they be talking about her, they would be wondering aloud what the company would do about the situation. Would Ms. Jane be sacked? Would she be allowed to stay? How come the company hasn't said anything yet?

If Yelp took too long to deal with the situation, employees might become distracted about the distraction itself.

But in this situation, Ms. Jane was terminated quicker than it takes to watch Braveheart. And that's a long movie.

Yes, Mr. Stoppelman and his team acted correctly to deftly issue the termination of Ms. Jane on the same day. No sane CEO or competent company would do otherwise.

On the other hand, maybe there is another viewpoint.

What if Ms. Jane was suffering from some form of duress that caused her to publicly berate her CEO and company? What if this public cry for help is the result of a mental instability? What if the open letter was an act of bereavement?

Let us presume the Yelp HR team looked into such matters before issuing the termination order, and found there to be no reasonable correlation to the points above.

Could Ms. Jane's social media gaffe be used at Yelp as an opportunity to teach other Yelp employees what "not" to do? (Arguably, Yelp does not need Ms. Jane as an employee in order to do so.)

Ms. Jane suggests 85% of her monthly take home pay goes toward rent. The Bay Area is notoriously expensive, particularly with respect to housing. Was her outburst a chance for Yelp to champion a new cause? Could Yelp have become a lightning rod for the Bay Area and affordable housing, if not the livable wage argument for San Francisco county?

My personal opinion?

I fully understand the rationale for terminating Ms. Jane on the spot. It was the safest and arguably the sanest action to take.

But I also see Ms. Jane's open letter as an opportunity for Yelp to turn the misguided intentions of an employee into a new and redefined organizational purpose (at least for the Bay Area).

Was Yelp being just to fire Ms. Jane? Absolutely.

Was Yelp being fair to itself, in terms of potentially redefining a higher purpose for the organization? Time will tell. (And no, it does not need Ms. Jane to do so going forward.)

But it has a chance to take an inappropriate cry for help and initiate some overdue societal changes. That might make it fair.